0.23" thickness worth it????

This is a discussion on 0.23" thickness worth it???? within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by First Sgt
OK...I'll go against the masses...Course, that's not unusual for me. I'd choose/be carrying the weapon that I shot best and ...

OK...I'll go against the masses...Course, that's not unusual for me. I'd choose/be carrying the weapon that I shot best and that I felt most comfortable with based on reliability. I truly can't see how 0.23" in thickness would affect MY decision...There would be NO "worth it" factor here...Just a "feeling of confidence and security factor...JMO

Course, as has been proven in the responses so far...Size DOES matter!!!

I thought the same. But until you shoot/find a gun thats you can shoot just as well as the 1/4" thicker one. You will appreciate that in an IWB holster.If you wear fitted clothes. Not tight but not baggy or unless you decide to buy one size up on everything. Then it maynot matter

I would say that compromise is everything. Comfort is an issue. I know some are more comfortable than others and the saying its comforting not comfortable is true to a point. No one is going to carry the biggest badest gun that makes their (safer) life miserable. It is all compromise. For me thickness is a very significant factor so for me yes it would, unless I was pocket carrying it. My widest CCW is a 442 and it is not carried IWB very often. The others I do IWB carry have all been single stacks and as thin as I could get em.

I thought the same. But until you shoot/find a gun thats you can shoot just as well as the 1/4" thicker one. You will appreciate that in an IWB holster.If you wear fitted clothes.

- I had the same experience. I wear fitted clothing, so a thinner gun is much more comfortable. I originally went from a Glock 27 to a Kahr MK9. About the same weight, but the Kahr was noticeably thinner. I switched to a Kahr PM9 after a few years and the lighter weight was an even more comfortable carry.

Yes, comfort is a factor. Despite the fact that a firearm is supposed to be "comforting, more than comfortable", if it is NOT comfortable, you won't have it to BE comforting. I have gotten away from carrying my Judge because it is so blamed heavy. I now only carry it when I am making the bank run at work. The remainder of the time I just carry my TCP. I am looking at a lighter (than the judge) semi- for EDC. I just wish that I could check some out LOADED to verify weight.

Dealing with the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy - I have been carrying my Glock 30 in an OWB holster every minute of the last week, other than while sleeping. Ruger LCR as a BUG in the opposite pocket. Concealed under an untucked shirt this evening at a local mall (place had power and heat, and the kids needed a place to burn off some cabin fever) and as far as I could tell not a soul noticed.

A lot will depend on how you need (or prefer) to dress. Tucked in dress shirt is a lot different than untucked casual clothing.

Give some consideration to the Smartcarry as well - you can carry a lot more gun with discretion than with just about any other carry method.

I carry both the G26 and the Kahr PM9. There is not much difference in concealment, but there is a huge difference in how the guns fitmy hands. You need to shoot both to see which is more comfortable in your grip. I you have smaller hands, the G26 will definitely feel "fat"....

I spent a lot of time checking out single stack 9s when they first started to come out. I still carry my G26. Why? I don't think there is enough of a difference to make it worthwhile to me to make the change. When I carry I always wear a cover shirt. I'm not a slim fellow at all and I can conceal a G17 with one. Right holster and belt is the key to easier concealment.

The reason that would make me choose to buy and carry a Shield is not for carry comfort. It is, if it fit my hand better than the Glock. Period.

Personally, I find not carrying any gun is a lot more "comfortable" than carrying one. But if I'm gonna carry, it should be a gun I shoot well, have confidence in, has decent capacity, sights that I can see and finally is fairly easy to conceal.

Concealed carry marketing has caused most manufacturers to produce a line of thinner guns, and that's great, something we like to take advantage of. IMO, guns can't continue to get thinner and thinner every year, there is a limit and end-point to thin design, and I think we are about there now.

I do CC some of those modern thin guns sometimes, however consider going the other way with just a bit thicker full-sized gun and re-think your carry method. YMMV

The thickness of a gun matters to me only in where I'm carrying the gun, not comfort. The comfort factory for me is determined by barrel lenght and weight of the gun.

True, weight more than anything really. Some people though are limited by body type, acceptable mode of dress, etc, in where (on their person) they CAN carry in which case the other dimensions (length, height and width) come into play.

IMO weight plays a role. A thinner gun usually will be lighter and feel better. I carry a Glock. I like it and can handle the grip and shoot it well. But almost every other gun out there I grab feels better in the hand. When I Owb I don't even think about thin guns. But when Summer hits again and I Iwb I want one. IMO the need for more guns...or my excuse.

Makes all the difference and is the reason that while I love the M&P fullsize 9mm, I feel it gets too uncomfortable for carry. But would not go to the compact version...not enough difference, still a brick.

I am however, saving up for M&P Shield. They finally created the carry gun I want!